States RIGHTS on Collision Course with Obama Administration!

This is a discussion on States RIGHTS on Collision Course with Obama Administration! within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; July 4 Warning: American "POLICE STATE" Ahead
WND:
by Henry Lamb
Every July 4, we retreat to fireworks, feast and festival in celebration of an ...

States RIGHTS on Collision Course with Obama Administration!

July 4 Warning: American "POLICE STATE" Ahead

WND:

by Henry Lamb

Every July 4, we retreat to fireworks, feast and festival in celebration of an independence that is rapidly becoming little more than a memory. Our ancestors declared their independence in 1776 from a tyrannical, overbearing government.

The independence claimed by the authors of the U.S. Constitution helped them create a government expressly prohibited from becoming tyrannical and overbearing, by limiting its power to certain enumerated responsibilities.

Those limitations have long been ignored, and the current government makes no apology for its overbearing tyranny.

Just as American independence was foreshadowed by a tea party in Boston, America’s new independence is foreshadowed by tea parties across the nation. There is more evidence that a new declaration is being drafted.

Currently, 36 states have approved or are considering some form of state sovereignty resolution. Several states are following Montana’s example, enacting laws that defy federal intervention. More than a dozen states have enacted or are considering legislation that prohibits the federal government from imposing a mandatory National Animal Identification System. These are symptoms of a society that is dissatisfied with the long train of abuses government continues to inflict upon it.

As the modern-day freedom fighters begin to organize and strategize, the government chooses not to reform, but to entrench and expand its control over the people.

The similarity is remarkable, between the rise of the Democratic Socialist Party now in control of Washington and the rise of the National Socialist Workers Party of Germany in the 1930s.

Led by an articulate orator, the German government set out to nationalize health care, transportation, manufacturing and law enforcement. The Obama government has set out to nationalize manufacturing of autos and the finance industry. The Obama-backed “cap and trade” legislation will effectively nationalize the energy and transportation industries. And Obama’s nationalized health care program is on the front burner.

Now here’s another similarity: nationalization of law enforcement. H.R. 675, sponsored by Democrat Rep. Bob Filner, was introduced to:

Provide police officers, criminal investigators, and game law enforcement officers of the Department of Defense with the authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms. (Emphasis added.)

Why do employees of the Department of Defense need the authority to execute warrants, make arrests and carry firearms? When the bill was introduced, Filner said: “We need to ensure that federal, state and local law enforcement are able to work together to apprehend criminals and to prevent and solve crimes.”

The 1878 Posse Comitatus Act explicitly prohibits the Department of Defense from involvement in state and local law enforcement activities. The feds have the FBI to investigate federal crimes and the Justice Department to prosecute federal crimes. Waco and Ruby Ridge are good examples of federal law enforcement. And the land management agencies have gun-totin’ enforcement officers to prevent tourists from picking up arrowheads on federal property. Why do we need to authorize the secretary of defense to arm another domestic police force?

Take a clue from the authorities granted by the bill:

To execute and serve warrants;
To make arrests without warrants;
To carry firearms;
To enforce federal laws enacted to protect persons or property;
To prevent breaches of the peace and suppress affrays or unlawful assemblies. …

There are other authorities, but let’s focus on this last one: “To prevent breaches of the peace and suppress affrays or unlawful assemblies.” What is an unlawful assembly? Any assembly that is not authorized by government is unlawful.

Should an irate society decide to hold a tea party even if government refused to authorize it, then there must be a reliable federal law enforcement army to “suppress” the unlawful assembly. Local police cannot be trusted to “suppress” an assembly of their neighbors.

In Germany, this police force was called the Gestapo. In Germany, the people who resisted the nationalization of anything were immediately branded as “right-wing extremist” and denounced and ridiculed by government officials and by the press. Watch the government and press response to the April tea parties.

These people who assemble peacefully to protest government policies are described as “Astroturf” pawns of corporate interests by Speaker Pelosi, and as “ignorant rednecks” by Janeane Garofalo. Assemblies such as these were outlawed in 1930s Germany. They can be outlawed, and are being outlawed or otherwise prevented, in this country today.

The July 4 Atlanta tea party scheduled since March was abruptly canceled June 18 when a major donor to the Democratic Socialist Party now in control of Washington exerted sufficient influence to have permission to use the property withdrawn.

Americans can’t comprehend the possibility that the federal government could ever become as oppressive as Germany in the 1930s. Think again. How many bills are now floating around that seek to either register guns or outlaw them completely? This was one of the first objectives of the 1930s German government. Once the guns were registered, the Gestapo knew exactly where to go to confiscate them.

Is this why the Democrats in Washington now want to create a federal domestic police force?

Independence and individual freedom are not virtues to Democratic Socialists; but government control is.

Last edited by ExSoldier; July 6th, 2009 at 02:01 AM.
Reason: soften language in title

I think that the smell of something is on the air and I'm afraid to say it. And all it will take is pressure just a bit more pressure on that primer before the powder explodes and that powder is the Americans who still remember and cherish the freedom that is our right and not privilege.

There is more and more talk of this stuff everywhere and I am starting to get scared for our nation.

I agree with the basic premise of the article but for some historical inaccuracies.
The government of the Third Reich was itself extreme right wing. Dissenters were typically branded as communists and subversives.
The Nazi party expoused ultra-nationalism, race supremacy and intolerance for any thing or idea non German.
Much has been said about gun registration in Nazi Germany, but it was not nearly as oppressive as what our masters in DC have planned. I lived in Germany from 1974-1977 and got to know many Germans. As far as I could ascertain, there was gun registration from 1933-1945, but only certain elements of society were prohibited from owning guns. There was never confiscation enmasse. In fact children were introduced and encouraged to use guns at a very young age and hunting was thought of as a type of national sport to bring the people together. It would seem that Hitler is more benevolent than Obama where guns are concerned.

I to am afraid for our country and way of life. The America I grew up in is almost gone. If our government can twist and break constitutional laws and restrictions, does that not also break the bonds that bind us as a people? If I have a contract with someone else is it right for me to twist the law out of context for my benefit? If the gov. takes laws out of context because they have the power don't we have a morale right to defy these laws? Can we still do this peacefully?

They are masters at playing the game; I give them the credit they deserve. They don't want the frog to jump from the kettle.

Iran's protests are "noble" but ours are "low level terrorism". What this tells me is that our leaders are no different than Iran's leaders. We are far into the dusk of liberty's setting sun, our leaders operate from a perspective of privilege and see themselves as rulers over loyal subjects, not fellow citizens of the populace. They are above us, better than us, beyond us; and they will prove it when we fall into steeper forms of oppression but they are sipping Margaritas at Club Med in Tahiti. Cha ching.

They are lucky to have so many people who don't know the difference between a subject and a citizen, people who gladly kiss the ring and have no clue what is wrong with having "royalty"; after all Obama is a Royal in his own way, isn't he?

I think that the smell of something is on the air and I'm afraid to say it. And all it will take is pressure just a bit more pressure on that primer before the powder explodes and that powder is the Americans who still remember and cherish the freedom that is our right and not privilege.

There is more and more talk of this stuff everywhere and I am starting to get scared for our nation.

I agree, every conversation about politics I find myself in finds its way to expressing some level of dissatifaction with our Federal government and the current direction things are heading, and a fear of Obamam destroying the USA from withhin.

Crap, and I thought I was done with my tin foil hat for a while. Nope I guess I can keep it handy after all. Even though this bill may never see the light of day outside the commitee, I can see where in some instances it may be necessary.

Take for instance a military base or Army Depot that is being decommissioned and the lands are being turned over for public use. They may still be owned by the DOD, but would be available to the public for hunting/fishing, or general recreation. Who is going to provide the law enforcement for those properties? It would be nice if the author of the article quoted the bill correctly. I wonder if he actually read the text of the bill. Probably not, since it would not read as well or get him the amount of attention he is looking for.

To amend title 10, United States Code, to provide police officers, criminal investigators, and game law enforcement officers of the Department of Defense with authority to execute warrants,... (Introduced in House)

HR 675 IH

111th CONGRESS

1st Session

H. R. 675
To amend title 10, United States Code, to provide police officers, criminal investigators, and game law enforcement officers of the Department of Defense with authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

January 26, 2009
Mr. FILNER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

A BILL
To amend title 10, United States Code, to provide police officers, criminal investigators, and game law enforcement officers of the Department of Defense with authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. AUTHORITY FOR POLICE OFFICERS, CRIMINAL INVESTIGATORS, AND GAME LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE TO EXECUTE WARRANTS, MAKE ARRESTS, AND CARRY FIREARMS.

(a) Authority- Chapter 81 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section:

`Sec. 1585b. Law enforcement officers of the Department of Defense: authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms

`(a) Authority- The Secretary of Defense may authorize any law enforcement officer of the Department of Defense--

`(1) to execute and serve any warrant or other process issued under the authority of the United States;

`(2) to make arrests without a warrant--

`(A) for any offense against the United States committed in the presence of that officer; and

`(B) for any felony cognizable under the laws of the United States if the officer has probable cause to believe that the person to be arrested has committed or is committing the felony; and

`(3) to carry firearms.

`(b) Persons To Have Authority- Subsection (a) applies to any law enforcement officer of the Department of Defense whose duties include--

`(1) enforcing laws enacted for the protection of persons and property;

`(2) preventing breaches of the peace and suppressing affrays or unlawful assemblies;

`(3) conducting, supervising, or coordinating investigations of criminal activity in programs and operations of the Department of Defense; or

`(4) enforcing any rules or regulations with respect to Department of Defense property prescribed by duly authorized officials.

`(c) Guidelines on Exercise of Authority- The authority provided under subsection (a) shall be exercised in accordance with guidelines issued by the Secretary of Defense and approved by the Attorney General.

`(d) Definition of Law Enforcement Officer of the Department of Defense- In this section, the term `law enforcement officer of the Department of Defense' means a civilian employee of the Department of Defense who is any of the following:

`(1) A Federal police officer or detective as classified by the Office of Personnel Management Occupational Series 0083 (or any successor to that series).

`(2) A game law enforcement officer or special agent as classified by the Office of Personnel Management Occupational Series 1812 (or any successor to that series).

`(3) A criminal investigator as classified by the Office of Personnel Management Occupational Series 1811 (or any successor to that series) and not employed as a special agent of the Defense Criminal Investigative Service (or any successor to that service).'.

(b) Clerical Amendment- The table of sections at the beginning of such chapter is amended by adding at the end the following new item:

`1585b. Law enforcement officers of the Department of Defense: authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms.'.

Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.www.ddchl.com
Texas CHL Instructor
Texas Hunter Education Instructor
NRA Instructor

Crap, and I thought I was done with my tin foil hat for a while. Nope I guess I can keep it handy after all. Even though this bill may never see the light of day outside the commitee, I can see where in some instances it may be necessary.

Take for instance a military base or Army Depot that is being decommissioned and the lands are being turned over for public use. They may still be owned by the DOD, but would be available to the public for hunting/fishing, or general recreation. Who is going to provide the law enforcement for those properties? It would be nice if the author of the article quoted the bill correctly. I wonder if he actually read the text of the bill. Probably not, since it would not read as well or get him the amount of attention he is looking for.

Wouldn't DoD police already have jurisdiction on such properties? And if not, why not just make the law apply there? Why do they have to have jurisdiction everywhere?

"Trust in God with hand on sword" -Inscription on my family's coat of arms from medieval England
---Carry options: G26/MTAC, PF9/MiniTuck, PPK/Pocket, USP40/OWB---
---NOTE: I am not an expert. If I ever start acting like a know-it-all, please call me on it immediately. ---

Wouldn't DoD police already have jurisdiction on such properties? And if not, why not just make the law apply there? Why do they have to have jurisdiction everywhere?

I guess it depends. Currently if a depot for instance is being run by the DOD, then yea, they would have jurisdiction. But if the depot is shut down, and the military turns control of the area over to another agency, non military or non governmental, like one in our area is in the process of being turned over, then who will have jurisdiction? That may not be so cut and dried once a private entity has control of DOD property.

I don't read the text of the bill to allow then jurisdiction "everywhere". There must be a specific reason behind this legislation, as there is most everything that gets put up. I am not going to assume that it is meant to give Secretary Gates the authority to start his own national police force and start locking up the citizenry across the whole of the country. I think Gates has plenty on his plate now to keep him busy.

Just remember that shot placement is much more important with what you carry than how big a bang you get with each trigger pull.www.ddchl.com
Texas CHL Instructor
Texas Hunter Education Instructor
NRA Instructor

...Even though this bill may never see the light of day outside the commitee, I can see where in some instances it may be necessary.

Take for instance a military base or Army Depot that is being decommissioned and the lands are being turned over for public use. They may still be owned by the DOD, but would be available to the public for hunting/fishing, or general recreation. Who is going to provide the law enforcement for those properties?

The same people who have been doing so as assigned that job for generations toward public land management & use and enforcement of game laws:

* The U.S. Park Police
* The National Park Service and Park Rangers.
* The US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) who have a whole division of FLEO embued power Game Wardens that are in the field current at every state and do already enforce game laws on not just federal but state lands too. They have full police powers including arrest at levels directly same as the FBI and the United States Marshal Service. The only lands and game management Federalized agency to have such FLEO powers. Additionally many state game wardens are federally deputized by the USFWS so as to enforce federal game laws and/or patrol on federal lands public or closed and to backup/assist USFWS FLEO when in the field as they commonly overlap in mission and projects.
* The US Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
* Department of Defense Law Enforcement Conservation Officers
* National Marine Fisheries Service
* The Federal Bureau of Investigations
* The US Coast Guard

We do not need generalization of of the Department of Defense to be able to embue any agent there under to have national and by that state and local law enforcement powers.
It would not only be just another layer but more importantly it would be in effect a nullification of Posse Comitatus as the writer of the article states.

For more info on the above agencies and their powers see their sites at...

I instruct Basic Hunter Education as member of a team of USFWS employee instructors including a USFWS field agent FLEO (nationalized game warden) and in a second group I am member of we have an NPS park ranger who also is federalized, along with state game wardens and local law enforcement officers as well.
We teach in class that depending on the state and region you're in, and not just in MA, as well as the game that you are after and the _public access_ property where you might hunt that you may come into contact with agents from any of the above named agencies there to enforce various laws be they toward game taken from the land, air, and/or at waterways by gun, bow, trap, or hook.

We do not need the Depart of Defense involved in land management as we already have the Dept. of Interior and Bureau of Land Management in place for as much and during civil emergencies FEMA, the FBI, and the US Coast Guard handle those tasks as does state based National Guard groups at the specific and lawful request of state governors.

- Janq

"(c) Guidelines on Exercise of Authority- The authority provided under subsection (a) shall be exercised in accordance with guidelines issued by the Secretary of Defense and approved by the Attorney General...'1585b. Law enforcement officers of the Department of Defense: authority to execute warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms.'." - H.R. 675

People laugh,.. I was shocked to see a program that announced some of it on TV last night,. The underworld just loves to flaunt this stuff in front of everyone and most people just think it is nothing,. Blind as a bad,...